Attorney General v Durlacher

Attorney General v Durlacher

Given the evidence of repeated unsuccessful and vexatious litigation by Mr Durlacher and his inability to attend due to serious illness, the appropriate course is to adjourn the application and grant an interim injunction restraining further proceedings until further order.

Parties
Claimant: HM Attorney General; Defendant: Paul Durlacher
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2004
Procedural Posture
Application for Civil Proceedings Order / Interlocutory Hearing
Outcome
adjourned with interim injunction granted
Legal Topics
Vexatious Litigants, Civil Proceedings Order, Interim Injunction
Civil Procedure Vexatious Litigants Civil Proceedings Order Interim Injunction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HM Attorney General

Claimant

Paul Durlacher

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Civil Proceedings Order / Interlocutory Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a civil proceedings order should be made against Mr Durlacher under section 42 of the Supreme Court Act 1981
  2. 2 Whether an interim injunction should be granted pending final determination

Ratio Decidendi

Given the evidence of repeated unsuccessful and vexatious litigation by Mr Durlacher and his inability to attend due to serious illness, the appropriate course is to adjourn the application and grant an interim injunction restraining further proceedings until further order.

Court Disposition

adjourned with interim injunction granted

Orders

  • Application adjourned.
  • Interim injunction granted in the same terms as a civil proceedings order under section 42(1)(a) of the Supreme Court Act 1981, to remain in force until further order.